Fleet Management Division Internal Services FundsBUDGET AND PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT
Internal Audit Division
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Kathie G. Brooks, Interim City Ma~ / ..,.......--
James J. Sutter, Internal Auditor~~
August 3, 2012
INTERNAL AUDIT REPORT
AUDIT:
PERIOD:
Fleet Management Division Internal SeNice Charge Billings Audit
October 1, 2008 through July 31, 2011
This report is the result of a regularly scheduled audit of the methodology applied and the
processes implemented in the documenting and recording of fuel disbursed, depreciation
charges levied and vehicle repair work performed by Fleet Management Division personnel and
the accuracy of the corresponding internal service charges billed to its participating user City
departments/divisions. The vehicle repair services provided to the Village of Key Biscayne were
excluded from our testing.
INTRODUCTION
The Fleet Management Division's daily operations of fuel availability and distribution to City
vehicles and locations, consumption activity processing, and reporting of all information
associated with these processes is primarily controlled through the RNI FueiOmat System
(RNI). This system keeps track of unleaded gasoline and diesel fuel dispensed at the Fleet
Management pumps or by its tanker truck. Additionally, they utilize the FASTER system for
asset management, automotive parts, mechanic labor and fuel consumption tracking. The RNI
and FASTER systems are integrated through a computer interface that allows daily uploads of
RNI records of fuel distributed from the pumps and tanker truck.
Most City vehicles are equipped with a Vehicle Identification Unit (VIU) and a coil/ring installed
around the fuel inlet which operate together allowing fuel to be dispensed from Fleet
Management's pumps or from the tanker truck. A programmable fuel key is used as an
alternative device for vehicles and equipment not outfitted with a VIU and coil/ring, so they also
may be fueled at the Fleet Management's pumps or the tanker truck. Any fuel purchased at the
pumps or tanker truck is currently marked up by $.10 per gallon to help offset administrative
costs.
Fuel is also obtained for the City's fleet through the usage of credit cards issued to City
employees for special fueling needs. The City vehicles that use these issued credit cards
include the Fire Department and Fire Rescue trucks stationed at the northern end of the City
because of the distance from Fleet Management; Police Department motorcycles because they
require premium gasoline not available at Fleet Management's pumps; and off-road vehicles
such as ATVs because they need to be fueled at the closest and safest location.
These credit card fuel purchases are reviewed monthly when the account statements are
received by Fleet Management. They trace all the receipts provided by City personnel to the
charges identified on the credit card statements. For record keeping and charge back
purposes, these purchases are manually entered in the RNI or FASTER systems to be
We are committed to providing excellent public service and safely to all who live, work, and play in our vibrant, tropical, historic community.
Internal Audit Report
Fleet Management Division Internal Service Charge Billings Audit
August 3, 2012
subsequently allocated to the respective user departments/divisions.
The Fleet Management Division also develops vehicle/equipment bid specification packages so
that approved items may be purchased for departments/divisions. Afterwards, they use the
straight line depreciation method with no salvage value to charge back the vehicles entire cost
to the user through the FASTER system. Most vehicles are depreciated over a five or six year
estimated useful life while boats are typically depreciated over ten years. Consequently, Fleet
Management will charge back an equal amount each month to the user over the vehicles
determined useful life (ex. $30,000 purchase price/60 months useful life = $500 per month).
These depreciation charges are reversed at fiscal year end on the City's Financial System so
that only the debt service is actually charged back to the user departments/divisions.
The Fleet Management Division's Warehouse Operation also orders, stocks and issues
automotive parts required for the operation and maintenance of the City's fleet. The distribution
of warehouse parts begins when a work order is opened for repair service or scheduled
maintenance of vehicles and equipment, or when warehouse personnel identifies the need to
re-order parts. A work order is initially prepared by the Fleet Service Representative in the
FASTER System upon a vehicle complaint/request for service form completed by the person
bringing the vehicle in for service.
A mechanic is assigned to evaluate the needed repairs and/or perform the required service
work. The mechanic comes to the on-site warehouse and identifies what work is required. If a
non-stock part is needed, a form is completed and the purchase order placed. Conversely, if
the needed part is in stock, the warehouse employee enters the information in the work order,
pulls the part from the storeroom and gives it to the mechanic. The part number is entered on a
warehouse log sheet and signed by the mechanic as evidence of receipt.
Non-stock parts charges are based on the cost at the time of purchase, while stock part charges
represent an average cost based on the last three purchase prices paid for the part. The
current 20% mark-up percentage levied by Fleet Management is analyzed annually based on
the total of warehouse employees' salary and benefits and overhead expenses for the
warehouse location and the cost of parts, tires, etc. issued. All marked-up parts along with $75
per hour labor charges needed to perform the vehicle repair are to be entered in the FASTER
system under the designated work order so that they can be subsequently charged back to the
user department/division.
Shortly after the conclusion of each month, the Fleet Analyst generates RNI and FASTER
system reports of the fuel disbursed, eligible depreciation charges and vehicle repair costs for
each City department/division. Any associated vehicle costs incurred internally by the Fleet
Management Division are also included and allocated to the other users.
An Excel spreadsheet is prepared summarizing each City departments/divisions monthly costs
for fuel disbursed, depreciation and vehicle repairs (excluding those pertaining to accidents,
abuse, vandalism or major repairs). Fleet Management calls these 503 charges because they
are billed to the user through their designated general ledger account ending in 000503. For
example, any vehicle charges relevant to the City Manager's Office would be charged to general
ledger account number 011-0310-000503. Once this spreadsheet is completed, it is forwarded·
to the Finance Department for entry into the City's Financial System through monthly journal
entry number 001. The user departments/divisions do not receive this spreadsheet so they do
not get an itemized breakdown on the individual components, nor is there any year-to-date data
Page 2 of 11
Internal Audit Report
Fleet Management Division Internal Service Charge Billings Audit
August 3, 2012
available by component for the departments being charged.
Meanwhile, any remaining costs resulting from accidents, abuse, vandalism or major repairs are
tabulated similarly in another Excel spreadsheet. The Finance Department receives this
finalized spreadsheet and charges back the listed departments/divisions through the
corresponding general ledger accounts ending in 000513 (513 charges) via monthly journal
entry number 001.
Internal Audit randomly selected transactions (excluding those involving the Village of Key
Biscayne) occurring during the months of March 2009, July 2010 and April 2011 for testing. The
following table provides a summary of the dollar amounts tested separated by 503 and 513
charges:
March 2009 July 2010 April2011 Total
Fuel Disbursed $138,764 $196,939 $286,758 $622,461
Depreciation $229,002 $251,740 $256,668 $737,410
Vehicle Repairs $224,462 $177,965 $220,178 $622,605
Total 503 Charges $592,228 $626,644 $712,279 $1,931,151
Accidents, etc. $21,510 $12,541 $15,732 $49,783
Total 513 Charges $21,510 $12,541 $15,732 $49,783
Total $613,738 $639,185 $728,011 $1,980,934
OVERALL OPINION
As a result of our testing during the audit we were able to determine that the Fleet Management
Division maintains an adequate level of internal controls over fuel disbursement, depreciation
charges and vehicle repairs. However, inherent concerns whether all vehicle repair information
is correctly and timely entered into the FASTER System could not be satisfied as all subsequent
calculations are based on the accuracy of the mechanics' inputs. If incorrect or incomplete
entries are made, then inaccurate amounts will be charged back to the user
departments/divisions. Consequently, all testing was performed under the assumption that all
vehicle repairs' parts and labor were billed correctly by the mechanics.
The following internal service charges billing shortcomings in need of improvement were noted:
• The Fleet Management Division's 510 fund sustained total net operating losses of
$3,536,512 during the audit period thereby decreasing the July 31, 2011 fund balance to
$6,539,749.
• Fleet Management is currently charging user departments/divisions $25 per month for fully
depreciated vehicles that remain in active service.
• Differences were identified between the amounts listed on the FASTER system generated
reports and those amounts actually charged back to user departments/divisions.
• The Fleet Management Division's vehicles monthly fuel disbursement allocations were not
necessarily equitable and differed from those done for depreciation and vehicle repairs.
• Divisional policies and procedures are currently being updated to better reflect current
monthly charge back operations but have not been completed to date.
Page 3 of 11
Internal Audit Report
Fleet Management Division Internal Service Charge Billings Audit
August 3, 2012
As the result of our verification of departmental measures, Internal Audit noted inaccuracies in
the March 2009 figures reported in the City's performance management software. A prior
internal audit report entitled "Fuel Distribution" covered October 2006 through March 2009 and
by coincidence it also identified this difference which the Fleet Management Division
subsequently corrected and hence the other two tested months of July 2010 and April 2011
were accurately reported.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this audit is to determine whether provided labor and materials were properly
documented and accurately charged back so that all associated costs are billed and reimbursed
in compliance with division policies and procedures; whether internal controls are soundly
developed and functioning and that provided documentation is sufficient to support tested
monthly charge back amounts; and whether all tested transactions were correctly recorded in
the City's Financial System and performance management software.
SCOPE
1. Confirm that documented updated operating policies exist, are known to staff and are
closely followed.
2. Confirm that well organized, complete and sufficient documentation is maintained to
adequately support all tested transactions.
3. Confirm that the internal control process implemented including a proper segregation of
duties is adequate.
4. Confirm that the methodology for the internal service charge billing process is sufficient.
5. Confirm that the work requested and completed on a monthly basis is properly billed out
to departments/divisions and that these charges include an overhead component which
is sufficient.
6. Confirm that revenues and expenditures are being monitored to ensure that Fleet
Management is operating within their established budget and that their fund balance is
not negatively impacted.
7. Confirm that tested transactions were correctly recorded into the City's Financial
System.
8. Confirm that tested data is accurately reported on the City's performance measurement
software.
FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND MANAGEMENT RESPONSES
1. Finding -Fleet Management's 510 Fund Ending Fund Balance Decreased by
$3,536,512 or35.10% During the Past Three Fiscal Years
Page 4 of 11
Internal Audit Report
Fleet Management Division Internal Service Charge Billings Audit
August 3, 2012
Fund 510 in the City's Financial System operates as an internal service fund meaning
that it is used to account for the financing of goods or services provided by one City
department to other City departments on a cost reimbursement basis. The fund is
meant to be self supporting with a break even objective as Fleet Management should be
billing or charging back other City user departments/divisions a sufficient amount
(including designated mark-ups to offset administrative costs, overhead, etc.) to cover its
costs.
The Fleet Management Division's 510 fund incurred the following net operating losses
for the 2008/09, 2009/10 and 2010/11 fiscal years:
*
510 Fund (Fleet Management) 10/01/08-10/01/09-10/01/10-
09/30/09 09/30/10 09/30/11 *
BeQinninQ Fund Balance $10,076,261 $8,535,793 $7,199,685
Revenues $7,512,782 $7,759,299 $8,908,871
Expenditures ($9,053,250) ($9,095,407) ($9,568,907)
Net (Loss)/Gain ($1 ,540,468) ($1,336,108) ($659,936)
Ending Fund Balance $8,535,794 $7,199,685 $6,539,749
Although the audit period ended on 07/31/11, the entire fiscal year was presented above
as it included all year-end adjustments to show a truer representation of the ending fund
balance.
As shown above, the 510 fund's ending fund balance decreased by $3,536,512
($10,076,261 -$6,539,749) or 35.10% during the last three fiscal year period as
expenditures exceeded revenues accordingly. At this rate, the fund balance will be
exhausted in approximately six years unless alternative approaches are implemented.
Subsequent discussions with Office of Budget and Performance Improvement personnel
found that one of the causes of the declining fund balance was the changing of
budgeting equipment replacement through debt service rather than through depreciation
charges in the fund balance. Budgeting monies for depreciation has not occurred for at
least the last three fiscal years. In addition, Fleet Management is budgeting for debt
service charges, both interest and principal, but at a lower rate than needed to cover the
loan repayment amounts originating from the purchase of the vehicles. Consequently,
the unbudgeted total difference in the table below shows the amount that Fleet
Management's budget is understated resulting in the corresponding City
departments/divisions also not being properly charged:
10/01/08-10/01/09-10/01/10-
09/30/09 09/30/10 09/30/11
Budgeted Depreciation $0 $0 $0
Actual Depreciation included in $3,237,442 $2,986,353 $2,802,532
Expenditures Total Above
Difference ($3,237,442) ($2,986,353) ($2,802,532)
Budgeted Debt Service $1,686,548 $1,686,548 $1,686,548
Actual Debt Service-Interest $201,246 $187,539 $173.995
Principal $1,801,586 $1,656,001 $1,718,166
Difference ($316,284) ($156,992) _($205,613)
Unbudgeted Total Difference ($3,553,726) ($3, 143,345) ($3,008, 145)
Page 5 of 11
Internal Audit Report
Fleet Management Division Internal Service Charge Billings Audit
August3, 2012
Recommendation( s)
The Fleet Management Division should coordinate with the Office of Budget and
Performance Improvement's Budget Division to adjust future budgets to include more
accurate amounts for depreciation and debt service so that they can take the appropriate
steps to reverse this trend of a declining fund balance.
Management's Response
Fleet Management is presently working and coordinating with OBPI for FY 2012/2013 to
more accurately represent debt services and depreciation. The use of the Fleet
Management fund balance for other purposes requires investigation.
2. Finding -Fleet Management Charges Users an Additional $25 Per Month for Fully
Depreciated Vehicles that Remain in Active Service
Fleet Management uses the straight line depreciation method with no salvage value to
charge back vehicles entire cost to the users through the FASTER system. Most
vehicles are depreciated over a five or six year estimated useful life while boats are
typically depreciated over ten years. Consequently, Fleet Management will charge back
and receive an equal amount each month from the user over the vehicles determined
useful life (ex. $30,000 purchase price/60 months useful life= $500 per month).
If the fully depreciated vehicle remains in active use by the City department/division,
then Fleet Management charges the user $25 per month thereby charging back more
than the actual purchase price. It was determined that there were 21 affected fully
depreciated vehicles in March 2009 which grew to 251 in July 2010 and finally to 274 in
April 2011 as the City has delayed purchasing new vehicles whenever possible.
Recommendation( s)
The Fleet Management Division should not charge back user departments/divisions for
more depreciation than the initial purchase price of the vehicle. The corresponding
mark-up amounts for fuel, labor and vehicle parts may need to be adjusted going
forward to compensate for this change.
Management's Response
The $25 per month charge is a usage/inflation factor charge. The difference between
the original cost of the vehicle and the new purchase price is the reason for the charge.
In some cases new environmental technology to meet the new government standards
requires additional charges. Interest rates have fallen, the cost of raw goods and oil
based products have increased. A method needs to be reviewed and initiated to cover
the difference for a Fire Engine that 15 to 20 years ago cost approximately $250,000 and
is now up to about $750,000.
3. Finding -Differences Identified Between the Amounts Listed on the System Generated
Reports and those Actually Charged Back to Users
RNI FueiOmat and FASTER System reports are generated shortly after the end of the
month to be used in determining the user departments/divisions charge back amounts
for 503 charges (fuel disbursement, depreciation and vehicle repairs excluding those
pertaining to accidents, abuse, vandalism or major repairs) and 513 charges (vehicle
repairs pertaining to accidents, abuse, vandalism or major repairs). 503 charges
represent general ledger accounts ending in 000503 (ex. City Manager's Office would be
011-031 0-000503) while 513 charges represent general ledger accounts ending in
Page 6 of 11
Internal Audit Report
Fleet Management Division Internal Service Charge Billings Audit
August 3, 2012
000513 (eg. City Manager's Office would be 011-031 0-000513). All calculations are
performed by one Fleet Management Division employee as no one else reviews these
figures for accuracy.
Internal Audit compared these system generated reports' listed figures to those amounts
actually charged back to the user departments/divisions for the randomly sampled
months of March 2009, July 2010 and April 2011 to find the following differences:
March 2009 July 2010 April2011
503 Charges
Fuel Charge Back $138,764 $196,939 $286,758
Fuel per Reports $138,764 $196,939 $286,758
Difference $0 $0 $0
Vehicle Repairs Charge Back $453,463 $429,705 $476,846
Vehicle Repairs per Reports $466,226 $429:534 $476,846
Difference ($12,763) $171 $0
Total 503 Charges Difference ($12,763) $171 $0
513 Charges
513 Charges Charge Back $21,510 $12,541 $15,732
513 Charges per Reports $21,873 $12,712 $15,732
Total 513 Charges Difference ($363) ($171) $0
Total Difference $13,126 $0 $0
Recommendation ( s)
The Fleet Management Division should scan the supporting documents for fuel
disbursed, depreciation and vehicle repairs under a designated place in the City's M
drive. Therefore, the City departments/divisions that utilize their services have the ability
to review and confirm the individual monthly transactions. Subsequently, the Fleet
Management Division Director should review and attest to the accuracy of the
corresponding charge back calculations. The implementation of these practices should
help better ensure the accuracy of the charge back amounts billed to the user
departments/divisions.
Management's Response
Fleet Management can place the scanned Excel Worksheet document that Finance
receives monthly on a designated location on the "M" drive for review by the end user
departments. The 513 difference is due to work orders that are not related to accident;
vandalism; operator responsible or major repair. Those differences remain in the 503
account. The 503 difference is due to the Fire Department's depreciation being
inadvertently omitted in the February 2009 Fleet Management chargeback for
departments 1210 and 1220 which was subsequently corrected by being included in the
March 2009 chargeback.
4. Finding -The Fleet Management Division's Vehicles Monthly Fuel Disbursement
Allocations Were Not Necessarily Equitable and Differed from Those Done for
Depreciation and Vehicle Repairs
During the 10/01/08 -07/31/10 audit period, the fuel disbursed by the Fleet
Management Division to their assigned vehicles was allocated evenly to each City
Page 7 of 11
Internal Audit Report
Fleet Management Division Internal Service Charge Billings Audit
August 3, 2012
department/division that received fuel regardless of the amount purchased. Therefore,
the user that hypothetically disbursed one gallon would be charged the same amount of
Fleet Management's allocated fuel expenses as another that received 1,000 gallons.
This practice is not consistent with the allocation of Fleet Management Division's
depreciation and vehicle repairs which is done proportionately based on the user's dollar
amount of repairs performed in relation to the Citywide monthly total. For example, the
department/division that incurred $100 in vehicle repairs of the monthly Citywide total of
$10,000 would be charged 1% ($100/$10,000) of Fleet Management's depreciation and
vehicle repairs. Following discussions with Internal Audit, Fleet Management agreed to
change their fuel purchase allocation to be consistent with those for depreciation and
vehicle repairs starting with August 2011.
In addition, the two City owned golf courses, Miami Beach Golf Club and Normandy
Shores Golf Club, did not receive an allocation of Fleet Management's fuel disbursed
despite receiving gasoline during each tested month. Yet, other similar City owned
facilities operated by independent contractors such as the Miami Beach Convention
Center and the Bass Museum received an allocation thereby slightly increasing their
monthly fuel costs accordingly.
Recommendation(s)
The Fleet Management Division should continue to allocate their monthly fuel
disbursements proportionately based on each departments/divisions usage in relation to
the Citywide total similar to the calculations performed for depreciation and vehicle
repairs. Also, the two City owned golf clubs should be included in Fleet Management's
future months' vehicles fuel allocations assuming that they receive fuel disbursements.
Management's Response
During the audit, the fuel distribution Excel Worksheet was changed to reflect
proportionate billing to the end user department for the monthly fuel charge.
5. Finding-Divisional Policies and Procedures Are In Need of Completion
The Fleet Management Division is currently in the process of updating their policies and
procedures. The provided monthly charge back billing operating policies and
procedures completed to date were deemed comprehensive and sufficient but need to
be finished and approved. The lack of updated procedures to ensure the uninterrupted
operation of the process is a matter of concern, given the almost total dependence on
one individual.
Recommendation(s)
The monthly charge back billing's operating policies and procedures should be
completed as soon as possible since they serve both as a benchmark to measure
individuals' performance and as an instruction manual in the event employees' change.
Once completed, they should be distributed to all applicable personnel so that they can
be read, understood and followed.
Management's Response
Fleet Management will try their best to update and complete the policies and
procedures, but due to the extra work load placed on end user departments, makes it
difficult to accomplish as a priority.
Page 8 of 11
Internal Audit Report
Fleet Management Division Internal Service Charge Billings Audit
August3, 2012
6. Finding -Review of Divisional Performance Measures
The Fleet Management Division's performance measurement scorecard was reviewed to
determine the accuracy of the following five departmental performance indicators
reported figures for the randomly sampled months of March 2009, July 2010 and April
2011:
Departmental Performance Measure Tested Month Reported Audited Difference
Police Patrol Gallons Used Monthly March 2009 * 32,800 31,462 1,338
July2010 29,114 29,114 0
April2011 30,064 30,064 0
Total 91,978 90,640 1,338
Fleet Fuel Charges Diesel Dispensed March 2009 * $18,328 $16,448 $1,880
CityWide July 2010 $28,975 $28,975 $0
A_pril 2011 $45,837 $45,837 $0
Total $93,140 $91,260 $1,880
Fleet Fuel Charges Gasoline March 2009 * $128,436 $125,962 $2,474
Dispensed City Wide July 2010 $171,493 $171,493 $0
April2011 $240,966 $240,966 $0
Total $540,895 $538,412 $2,474
Fleet Fuel Volume Gallons Diesel March 2009 * 10,473 9,399 1,074
Dispensed July 2010 11 '195 11 '195 0
April2011 11,892 11,892 0
Total 33,560 32,547 1,074
Fleet Fuel Volume Gallons Gasoline March 2009 * 69,425 68,087 1,338
Dispensed July 2010 66,776 66,776 0
April2011 65,786 65,786 0
Total 201,987 200,649 1,338
* The randomly selected month of March 2009 was by coincidence also included in the audit period for a
previously conducted internal audit entitled "Fuel Distribution" that was issued on 11/19/09. One of the
findings in this report also dealt with Fleet Management's cost allocations which caused the differences
noted above for March 2009. The Fleet Management Division subsequently made the identified
corrections and hence the remaining sampled months of July 2010 and April 2011 were reported
correctly.
Consequently, Internal Audit concludes that the figures reported for the five
departmental performance indicators listed are "certified" based on the criteria defined in
Exhibit 1 located at the end of this audit report. All identified differences occurred during
March 2009 were promptly corrected as identified in the footnote above so that the
reported figures for July 2010 and April 2011 were deemed accurate based on the
system reports provided.
Finally review of these five performance measures data entered in the City's
performance measurement software system found that the measure description and
data source were not present for the measure entitled "Police Patrol Gallons Used
Monthly". Additionally, the calculation methodology was not included for any of the five
performance measures tested.
Recommendation(s)
The Fleet Management Division should try and identify the root cause for the March
Page 9 of 11
Internal Audit Report
Fleet Management Division Internal Service Charge Billings Audit
August 3, 2012
2009 differences. Once completed, the necessary corrections should be made so that
the figures reported in the City's performance measurement software system are
accurate.
Among other items, the performance measurement software's definition and description
fields should include a definition of the measure, as well as the methodology for deriving
the measure, the data source, and references and/or sources of comparable
benchmarks. The Fleet Management Division should make the necessary corrections
for the five sampled performance measures so that these items are satisfied and then
review all other owned measures for compliance.
Management's Response
Prior to this internal audit, a separate audit was completed on the fuel management
system for the period October 2006 to March 2009. The outcome of that audit was to
create a method to manually enter all outboard transaction in the RNI Fuelomat System
for Hess; Shell; Chevron.; BP Amoco and Miami Beach Marina. The RNI Fuelomat
system has three (3) methods for entering data. First, the downloads from the dispenser
pumps; second, the downloads from the Tanker Truck; and third by manually entering all
the outboard receipts into the system.
EXIT CONFERENCE
An exit conference was held on April 11, 2012 in OBPI's Conference Room with Fleet Analyst
George Fisher and Senior Auditor Mark Coolidge. Audit findings and recommendations were
discussed, as were management responses, which are included herein. All were in agreement
with the contents of this audit report.
JJS:LFR:Ifr:MC:mc
(Audit performed by Laura Franco-Rubines and Mark Coolidge)
F:\OBPI\$AUD\INTERNAL AUDIT FILES\DOC10-11\REPORTS-FINAL\FLEET MGMT INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGE BILLINGS
RPT.docx
cc: Fred Beckmann, Public Works Director
Jay Fink, Assistant Public Works Director
Jorge Cano, Administrative and Business Officer
George Fisher, Fleet Analyst
Patricia D. Walker, Chief Financial Officer
Page 10 of 11
Internal Audit Report
Fleet Management Division Internal Service Charge Billings Audit
August 3, 2012
EXHIBIT: 1 -Assessment Categories for Performance Measures Verification
1:,~. . A$~~simel'tt eafegow · ,,;. (,!{'<' ,, i:'+I . ::,Hi .y' : crif~i!ia '::.::, .. :.iSr r · :., :1 ·: t~ir
Certified
Certified with Qualifications
Factors Prevented Certification
Inaccurate
If reported performance is 100% accurate and if it appears that
controls are in place to ensure accuracy for collecting and
reporting performance data. Measurement data is supported by
source documents.
This category is assigned under either one of two conditions:
1. Reported performance is within +/-3%, but the controls over
data collection and reporting are not adequate to ensure
continued accuracy
2. The department's calculation of actual performance deviates
from the measure definition, but was still within an
acceptable range.
Documentation is unavailable or incomplete and controls are not
adequate to ensure accuracy. This category is also assigned
when there is a deviation from the measure definition and the
reviewer cannot determine the correct measure result.
Actual performance is not within 3% of reported performance, or
there is a greater than 5% error in the sample of documents
tested.
EXHIBIT: 2 -Additional References for Performance Management Software's
Description of Measure
1) Measure Name:
2) Measure Type:
3) Measure Description:
4) Measure Frequency:
5) Data Sources:
6) Calculation Methodology:
Should list the name of the measure for which data is being
collected and reported.
Should recognize whether the measure is an "Input", "Output", or
"Outcome" measure. One must consider whether results are
measured through input (Ex: Customer surveys}, output (Ex:
Number of contracts completed without change orders), or
outcome (Ex: % of projects substantially completed or in
beneficial use within 120 days).
Should describe the measure. Some measures are self
explanatory and some may not; however, a description should
always be included (Ex: The measure considers the % of
change in the value of the change orders for a specific category
divided by the original project cost).
Describes how often performance data is reported (Ex:
Quarterly).
Should list sources used to collect performance data (Ex:
System Software Names, Report Names, Schedules, etc.)
Should explain how data reported was calculated (Ex: change
orders for that quarter divided by the original total projects costs,
projects substantially completed or in beneficial use within 120
days of the contract milestone date divided by the total number
of projects completed during the same quarter).
Page 11 of 11